#Heart vs. Mind Dualism

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of the Heart

The philosophy of the heart explores the symbolic, emotional, and metaphysical significance of the heart in human experience. It examines how the heart is viewed as the center of emotion, love, compassion, and inner truth across different cultures and philosophical traditions. Rather than focusing solely on the biological heart, this philosophy engages with the heart as a metaphor for the core of human existence, feelings, and moral judgment.

Key Themes in the Philosophy of the Heart:

Heart as the Center of Emotion:

The heart has long been associated with the seat of emotions, particularly love, compassion, and empathy. Ancient philosophies, such as those in Greek and Eastern traditions, viewed the heart as the emotional core of a person.

Philosophers like Pascal famously said, “The heart has its reasons, which reason does not know,” pointing to the idea that the heart’s emotional wisdom can transcend intellectual reasoning.

Heart and Moral Judgment:

The heart is often connected to notions of conscience and moral intuition. In many spiritual traditions, a "good heart" is seen as a moral compass, guiding individuals toward kindness and ethical behavior.

Confucian and Buddhist philosophies, for instance, highlight the importance of cultivating a compassionate heart as a source of moral and social harmony.

Heart and Mind Dualism:

The philosophical tension between the heart and the mind reflects a broader dualism between emotion and reason. The heart is often seen as the counterbalance to the rational mind, representing subjective experience and intuitive knowledge.

In existentialism and phenomenology, philosophers like Kierkegaard and Heidegger explore how human emotions, rooted in the heart, shape our experience of the world and our understanding of authenticity.

Heart as the Source of Life and Vitality:

Metaphorically, the heart is seen as the life force, embodying vitality, courage, and passion. This view is present in various traditions, where a "strong heart" indicates bravery and resolve, linking the heart to concepts like willpower and spiritual energy.

In Hindu and Taoist thought, the heart is associated with the life force or prana, connecting it to both physical health and spiritual well-being.

Heart in Religious and Mystical Traditions:

In many religious traditions, the heart is seen as a spiritual center. For example, in Sufism, the mystical branch of Islam, the heart is a symbol of the inner self, where divine truths are revealed through contemplation and love.

Christian theology often speaks of the "purity of heart" as a state of spiritual openness and closeness to God, while Buddhism emphasizes the cultivation of a "loving heart" through practices like metta (loving-kindness meditation).

Heart and Personal Identity:

The heart is frequently associated with personal identity, representing an individual's deepest desires, feelings, and truth. In many cultures, to follow one’s heart is to remain true to oneself, indicating a deeper sense of authenticity and self-realization.

In romanticism, the heart is seen as a repository of creative and emotional depth, often in opposition to societal constraints or rational norms.

Philosophy of Love and Relationships:

The heart plays a central role in the philosophy of love, representing vulnerability, emotional connection, and the transformative power of intimate relationships.

Philosophical explorations of love, such as those by Plato and Sartre, often place the heart at the core of the human desire for connection, whether through romantic, familial, or spiritual bonds.

Heart and Suffering:

The heart is also the seat of sorrow and grief, representing the pain and vulnerability that come with deep emotional experiences. The notion of a “broken heart” reflects philosophical inquiries into the nature of suffering and loss as integral to the human condition.

Buddhist philosophy explores the heart’s capacity to hold both suffering and compassion, suggesting that through cultivating a compassionate heart, one can transcend personal suffering.

The Heart’s Connection to Wisdom:

Some philosophical traditions equate the heart with wisdom. In Eastern thought, particularly in Taoism and Buddhism, the heart is often seen as a seat of deep, intuitive wisdom that surpasses intellectual knowledge.

This notion of the heart as a source of insight emphasizes the importance of emotional intelligence and inner peace in achieving a balanced and meaningful life.

Heart and Unity:

In many spiritual and philosophical traditions, the heart symbolizes unity and wholeness—a point where the individual connects with others, the universe, or the divine. This sense of interconnectedness is central to philosophies that stress the oneness of all beings, such as Advaita Vedanta or Ubuntu.

The philosophy of the heart provides a rich exploration of human emotion, moral judgment, spirituality, and personal identity. It asks us to consider the heart not merely as a physical organ but as a metaphor for the depths of our emotional and ethical lives. Across cultures and philosophies, the heart is viewed as a guiding force for compassion, love, wisdom, and inner truth, shaping how we experience and interpret the world.

[waitmyturtles]

Like last week, I’ll write up bigger Double Savage thoughts after the airing of tomorrow’s episode, but some quick notes on episode 3:

(Actually, I don’t know if I can do quick notes, because this episode held a lot.)

It’s clear that, along the lines of 10 Years Ticket, the Midnight Series, The Eclipse, and others -- that this show is about Big Commentary on a number of cultural themes that deeply affect Thai/Asian society and families.

How Korn can remain so loyal to his mother and siblings might well be beyond the understanding of many -- especially from where they stood emotionally as Korn’s father kicked Korn out. How Korn can remain so empathic to his friends and family after what’s happened to him -- it’s a little mind-boggling.

When he sees Pea, Korn reveals his internalized imposter syndrome, learned from his father’s treatment towards him: “I don’t want to drag anyone down. I don’t want anyone associated with me. I don’t want to get anyone in trouble.”

When Korn says to Li: “Our family doesn’t need a jinx like me.” He’s internalized the demeaning, destructive feedback that his father gave him. He wants to protect the family that he still loves by getting the fuck outta that house, and giving his father exactly what his father wants, because Korn thinks that that’s what will be good for his family. Good lord.

As I mentioned last week, when trying to understand why Korn shot the gun: it’s this internalized trauma that’s the key and real reason why Korn has ended up where he is. And how the chips continue to fall during that process -- how Li, of all people, ends up holding a gun. It’s a very predictable journey that a family will take, into poverty/crime/other negative socioeconomic impacts, that stem from an origin of family trauma. 

I’ve been reading that young Asians on TikTok, watching Double Savage, are posting about their own experiences being a middle child, a darker-skinned child, a cast-out, a black sheep. It’s REALLY MOVING TO ME (like, I feel my heart in pain) hearing about young Asians relating to this show, because I do, too. I basically lived out my internalized commentary about myself, believing EVERYTHING my family said about me, throughout my twenties, and spent my twenties recovering from that trauma. It wasn’t until a dear friend of mine, someone who I objectively trusted, stopped me mid-sentence in my explaining why my life was a mess, to tell me: dude, you’re doing fine. You can’t believe that shit.

I’d never heard that before, because in my case, my parents and siblings were all telling me that my life was out of control...when in fact, I was just paying rent and working, which they weren’t doing. I was living a normalized paradigm of society that they had actually rejected -- and gaslit me into believing that it WASN’T worth doing.

So this gaslighting that Korn’s father has done unto Korn -- it’s seriously relatable, completely emotionally unintelligible, and the endgame of where Korn has now ended up is totally believable, considering he BELIEVES WHAT HIS FATHER HAS SAID ABOUT HIM.

And yet. He makes his promises to Win that he won’t have feelings for Rung (BAD CHOICE, KORN AND WIN, THAT WILL END BADLY, no no no no nooooooooo, bros). He makes his promise to Li that he won’t do anything illegal. 

Korn, right now, still believes in the dualism of good vs. bad. He believes people are good or bad. He believes he’s a bad person. We see that Win will get into the police academy tomorrow. The police represent good... right?

Not from what Ah and Mek are telling Korn. We see now that that dualistic vision that Korn has in his youthful mind will get blown to pieces -- and he’ll begin to understand the how and why of how people are so complicated as he grows up. 

I see this show getting into Jojo-esque territory about how the people THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO CARE FOR US VERY OFTEN FAIL US -- our parents, our public enforcement, our politicians, etc. Why do families, like Pea’s, need to go to the local mafia/Robin Hood to borrow money? Likely because social structures are failing families. 

Dang it. This show’s gonna get into the shit. Now that Bed Friend is over, I can likely handle it better. But this show’s gonna get into the shit, and I’m hoping will be good about it. I’m finding these episodes to be quite the opposite of a drag -- they’re VERY well done, and Ohm/Perth/Film are kicking ass together. Let’s see about tomorrow.

[naruhearts]

14x18 First Watch Thoughts: Mary Winchester the Mirror, TFW and Destiel

**FLAILS**

My thoughts are practically incoherent because I’m having BIG FEELS right now...VERY big feels re: TFW/Destiel narratives.

I am SUPER glad Berens was the one who penned Mary’s death!! The episode was just well-done all around from start to finish and intensely executed, with the proper solid balance of angst, emotional insight from the characters placed inside Mary’s cathartic contextual role, and the consistent reiteration of Mary as TFW’s overall Parental Catharsis in 14x18′s storytelling (and S12-14′s whole parental premise in conjunction with John Winchester’s ghost). 

Mary was portrayed as the singular contrasting foil to TFW’s individual and combined arcs. Absence was, obviously, a core theme, with Mary’s absence -- her death -- playing out as A. familial purpose (accountability and her death as the impetus to work together --> forgive each other, forgive yourself), B. self-purpose (self-realization via Jack: what did I do? Why did I do it? Why do we do things?), and C. romantic purpose on the Dean/Cas front. 

Let me explain C. -- well, WE BEEN KNEW. The metasphere wrote about this (my post x).

x

Dean was HEAVILY subtextually framed as the angry spouse undergoing a rough patch with Cas over Mary’s death  (the tension, juxtaposed by sad orchestral strings and soft lighting, Dean lashing out at Cas, romantic framing via Dean’s back turned to Cas, their interactions holding frustration yet still underpinned by certain tenderness etc *sighhhhh*) and Dean continuing down the route of giving Cas, not Sam, frosty shoulders -- emphasized by the romantic visual framing of space between them e.g. Sam preventing Cas from comforting Dean during Mary’s funeral, backs again facing each other, Dean and Cas interacting sparsely, Dean bitter and disengaged, Cas longing for forgiveness from Dean, Sam as the overt brother caught in the middle as he embodies the role of mediator and stable thinker for both of them etc -- just strengthens my belief that Destiel is going to experience another (hopefully) intense romance-coded confrontation as intense as the one they had in the cabin -- one that leads up to a lover’s make-up or some kind of emotional breakthrough/realization which has Cas happy enough to be taken by the Empty (remember, DEAN STILL DOESN’T KNOW ABOUT CAS’ DEAL. Cas’ life to save his son’s life, harking back to Dean’s own fatherly self-sacrificial deal by saying Yes to Michael. He is utterly unaware that he’ll lose Cas) and it’s a double punch here, because Dean will realize how stupid he is for not appreciating Cas -- more accurately, trying to be mutually transparent and honest with him (he has, though, and he’s made leaps and bounds) before it’s too late but failing (final regression before progression). He does appreciate Cas, and Cas means more to him than anyone could ever describe *points at his Mind!Bar 14x10* yet their love languages still don’t align. IT’S NEVER TOO LATE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN, DEAN! 14x19 is written by BL so I additionally hope the D/C subtext from this point onwards works in our favour!!

As I said in above and in my liveblog posts, a summary: 

The differences in Dean’s grieving are a COMPLETE visual comparison to 12x23, complete with overhead 📸 shots and differing funeral pyre scenes: when he grieved over Cas, he was alone, kneeling on the ground, and was blatantly numb/emotionally incapacitated – Dean mourned the loss of his lover. When he’s grieving Mary, Sam is by his side. Brothers mourning the loss of their mother. Romantic vs familial.

Overt romance-coded parallels with Sam/Rowena keeping constant contact just like Dean/Cas do both offscreen and onscreen

Sam telling Dean IT WASN’T JUST CAS and his own emotional pull in this ep as expressing accountability for TFW’s actions in general – besides internalizing/talking about the self-guilt, shame, and the inevitable pain of losing people despite saving people (also re: the 🔑 theme of doing the wrong, stupid thing for the right reasons) -- was character development on a marvelous scale. Dean was enlightened and began to admit it himself. Honest, open words. Dean and Cas should learn from him!!

 Cas was absolutely humanized, subsuming the Winchester Way of Bringing Family Back, and he additionally evoked honesty/an emotional justification while admitting his mistakes and again representing FAITH: faith in Jack narratively linked to FAITH IN HIMSELF and the season-long theme of believing there’s another way -- in believing that good things shall come. As he appropriately told Anael last episode -- loneliness is a construct misconstrued by her; not being in one’s physical presence doesn’t mean they aren’t there -- they are there. They are there for you. Narrative symmetry with 14x17′s presence of emotional acknowledgement despite physical absence re: God (and TFW; just because Cas wasn’t with the Winchesters did not mean he loved them any less) vs 14x18′s absence of full-frontal communication despite physical presence re: Dean and Cas/TFW (being physically present also entails being emotionally present through HONESTY). Berens interlinked the subtext. Negative spaces are being filled. And there’s also an Evil/dark dimension added to this Presence vs Absence commentary: Lucifer’s a visage in Jack’s mind, just like Sam. Jack’s soullessness has come to a psychological crux. He’s teeter-tottering – tried desperately to bring Mary back, and now he might have fucked up the natural order (if BTS pics of zombies in 14x20 is linked to this).  Furthermore:

(*clutches chest* There’s the heartbreaking spousal-coded visual narrative.)

Oh, Cas...Jack is BOTH good and evil. This is the intrinsic dualism of human nature. It’s what makes Jack human. And goodness involves badness. 

CAS: [Jack] was good for us. Indeed, we know he was. The unhealthily-codependent-abusive notion of family TFW used to possess (where their overarching parental issues -- Chuck’s absence, John’s abuse and Mary’s absence -- crippled their early formative growth, extending into decades) was deconstructed and rebuilt in healthier ways. Being a parent to Jack offset their true capabilities/qualities: FAITH (Cas), HOPE (Sam), and LOVE (Dean), alongside all the stickiness that came with his birth. By direct association, Cas learned (is learning) how to believe in himself. Sam learned (is learning) how to hope in himself. Dean learned (is learning) how to love himself. Mental/emotional release from their internal chains took place (will come to its final culmination in S15). In other words, Jack the Unifying TFW Mirror -- like Mary -- was the great interpersonal conduit for (a Jesus-figure-representation) honesty, appreciation (spending time with your loved ones), positive vs negative self-process, and self-awareness. Keep in mind that Jack has characteristically taken the place of Dean, Cas and Sam’s own dark arcs (Soulless!Sam, in particular) with what looks like a Godstiel mirror in 14x19 -- he’s literally becoming textualized as TFW’s mirror -- and, like his parents, he is going to make his independent (wayward) choices and question the primacy of human nature: good, evil, and the grey in-between. Will he listen to his head or his heart?  Most of all, Jack taught them that HuntingTM is filled with pain, horror, and death, but genuine purpose lies beyond it. The lives they live are also innumerably interlinked with joy and happiness. These positive things aren’t as sparse as they think: they have each other.

Mary Winchester is ⚰️ and resides in Heaven (her death successfully made me emotional and packed a deep personal punch; the black and white flashbacks interspersed throughout 14x18 relative to Mary’s influence on TFW was A++). She disappeared right when TFW’s arcs came together to display character progression. Her purpose – pushing TFW to engage in self-introspection, personal growth, and honesty with the Self and others – is done.

Mary, the Cas mirror, carved M.W. into the table with S.W and D.W. You know who should be next, right? CASTIEL W. (and Jack W.) (recall that in 14x17, Mary relayed to Dean that she treasured and enjoyed her time with him and Sam -- channeling Cas’ 14x12 farewell speech. Mary has always embodied LOVE, both romantic and familial, with the great virtue of honesty, and Dean, by proxy, has been telling his family he loves them. Again, who is the next family member he’ll say I LOVE YOU to? What do Dean and Cas WANT? Time to answer this question!!)

WE HAVE COME FULL CIRCLE. Narrative cyclism, y’all. Mary and John Winchester are finally at ✌️, and by so doing, TFW will experience emotional/personal/psychological ✌️ as they leave their past behind to create their own optimistic self-actualized future. THERE’LL BE GENUINE PEACE WHEN YOU ARE DONE.

TFW MUST TALK

I mean, I’ll probably reblog this with new thoughts during the next few days, but yes, ENDGAME’S UPON US, and all the extensive meta regarding Dabb Era Love and...Love, Unity, Family, Honesty, the centrality of interpersonal relationships and Reconciliation of the Past & Future since Season New Beginnings 12/13 over Season Who Am I 14 should be realized in the final two ANGST-filled eps. TL;DR a gigantic multilayered soup of character-positive/relationship growth-positive meta coming to fruition for the main plot.

Berens has killed us all. 14x18 is one of my favourite Emotion-centric episodes yet!

RATING: 10/10

Thank you for reading my sloppier-than-usual word-vomit!

[eternal-echoes]

Some differences between Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism

I should first say that they are very similar in the regard that both churches claim to have the fullness of Truth, both have the apostolic succession, and both have the 7 sacraments. In fact, if there are no Catholic Churches nearby, a Catholic can receive communion from an Eastern Orthodox Church. We don’t do it regularly out of respect for them since they don’t believe we should receive theirs. 

So onto the differences: 

Scholasticism vs. Mysticism 

The Roman Catholic Church developed Scholasticism while there is more emphasis on mysticism in the Eastern Orthodox Church. 

Scholasticism is the term used for Medieval philosophy. It starts from the objective fact that God is the ultimate source of Being, the ultimate reality, and rationalizing from there. Formulating arguments for the existence of God by taking note of what we observe from nature and tracing ethics to God as being the source of morality. Scholastic philosophers in the Middle Ages drew heavily from the works of the Ancient Greek philosophers so you would see a lot of them, most notably St. Thomas Aquinas, comment on Aristotle. One criticism I’ve read from an Eastern Orthodox is that this development of rationalism in the Roman Catholic Church is what paved way to the Enlightenment. It’s honestly just a matter of perspective, rationalism is a tool; it can be used for either good or bad. Good in the way of strengthening the explanation in theology, but bad in the way that you just question the belief in God altogether. Rationalizing God as if you can fit in Him in your head. Even then, some skepticism is healthy to be able to dig deeper in the truth. 

This opinion is probably coming from ignorance, but personally, I think the mysticism in the Eastern Orthodoxy relies way too much on tradition. I believe you need rationalism to purify religion of superstitious whims that comes from human imagination. 

While it’s true that Eastern Orthodoxy didn’t change as much as Roman Catholicism, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. To quote Father Angel, “To be human and Christian is to be growing. It is be open to the ongoing inspirations of the Holy Spirit, who deepens our understanding of the Gospel and the Christ Event.” I believe that through all the years of the Church’s existence, the Holy Spirit has been spoon feeding us new ways for us to understand God’s word. Not to say that the Church’s teachings has evolved. Not to say that the Church’s teaching has evolved. Catholic theologians have a specific term for it: development in doctrine. Evolution in doctrine sounds like it has been cut off from its roots. But development in doctrine means that the Church receives her nourishment from her roots. G.K. Chesterton explains this better than I do: 

“When we talk of a child being well-developed, we mean that he has grown bigger and stronger with his own strength; not that he is padded with borrowed pillows or walks on stilts to make him look taller. When we say that a puppy develops into a dog, we do not mean that his growth is a gradual compromise with a cat; we mean that he becomes more doggy and not less. Development is the expansion of all the possibilities and implications of a doctrine, as there is time to distinguish them and draw them out; and the point here is that the enlargement of medieval theology was simply the full comprehension of that theology.”

Nicene Creed 

In the Nicene Creed, the Catholic Church has added the filioque, “and the Son,” while the Eastern Orthodox Church has criticized as for it. The reason why the Catholic Church added it is because: 

246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)". the Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration... And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son." 

248 At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father's character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he "who proceeds from the Father", it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son.77 The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque). It says this, "legitimately and with good reason",78 for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as "the principle without principle",79 is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds.80 This legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed.

- from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. 

One note about the filioque is that this is not included in the Nicene Creed in Eastern Rite Catholic Churches. That’s because the Greek language makes it seem to mean a different meaning. 

Original Sin

The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church have a different perspective on Original Sin. I’m not an expert on the Eastern Orthodox position but they seem to believe that Original Sin is a flaw. They don’t believe that we inherit Original Sin because it was only our first parents who sinned, and we only inherited the effects of it. Effects being the flaw: weakened will, tendency to sin, and mistake evil for goodness. 

The Catholic Church position is that when Adam sinned, his body became corrupt, and there was no uncorrupted body for us to inherit. The term Original Sin implies guilt, someone did it out of their own free will that made us lost the grace. 

Here’s a better explanation. 

Immaculate Conception

Immaculate Conception is the doctrine that the Blessed Virgin Mother Mary was conceived without Original Sin, unlike the rest of us who have to receive the Sacrament of Baptism to cleanse the Original Sin from us. The reason God designed Mary to be that way is because the vessel for His Son has to be clean. Not to say that the Blessed Virgin Mother Mary did not need saving from Jesus, she did. But hers was unique because it happened beforehand. Jesus’ death still saved her. An analogy to explain this is how you would use a credit card to buy something you don’t have money for yet. You would eventually pay it off with the earned money at a later date. Another way to explain how Mary was saved compare to how we were saved is the two different ways you can save someone from the puddle. One is blocking their way of going to the puddle and one is after the person has slipped into the puddle, you offer your hand so he/she can get out of it. The Blessed Virgin Mother Mary was saved similar to the former, we were saved like the way in the latter. 

The Eastern Orthodox Church do not believe in the Immaculate Conception. There are two reason for this, one is because of what I said earlier, they have a different conception of Original Sin. Since they don’t believe we inherit the Original Sin but only the flaw that comes with it, they also believe Mary was flawed, even though she never personally committed any sin herself. The other reason is that the doctrine of Immaculate Conception has only been recently been promulgated. It wasn’t that the Church didn’t believe in it before, there was a tradition behind it. It was just implicit. Pope Pius IX made it more define. 

Sacred Heart of Jesus 

Someone asked me how to respond to an Eastern Orthodox about the devotion to the Sacred Heart, saying it was like praying to a body part. I think that reaction stems from the fact that Scholastic philosophy didn’t develop in the Eastern Orthodox Church. In Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy, there is a term called Hylermorphic doctrine. It teaches that the body and soul, make up one substance. As opposed to the teaching of Descartes, dualism, teaching that the mind is separate from the body, and you are only your mind and the body is just your instrument. In relation to Christ, praying to His Sacred Heart is essentially praying to Him as a whole person. Just with emphasis on His heart because He loves us with it. 

Also, the devotion to the Sacred Heart is from the approved apparition to St. Margaret Mary of Alacoque. This happened after the Great Schism so this is absent in their tradition. 

Supremacy of the Pope

Eastern Orthodox Christians do not believe that St. Peter had that authority, but here are the passages in the Bible that we Catholics cite in support of that: 

+Among the Twelve Apostles, Peter’s name is mentioned the most, being 195 times in New Testament, while the next one, St. John, is mentioned 29 times.

+Whenever the apostles are all listed by name as a group, Peter’s name is always mentioned first, while Judas, the Lord’s betrayer, is always mentioned last.

+There are times when the apostles aren’t called by names but instead we see phrases like “Peter and the others,” which indicates that Simon Peter represented the college of apostles.

+Matthew 16: 18-19

+Jesus called Peter to come out of the boat and walk on water (Matt. 14: 25-33)

+Jesus Christ preached to the crowds from Simon Peter’s fishing boat.

+St. John waited for St. Peter to enter the empty tomb of Christ (John 20:6)

+Luke 22:31-32

+St. Peter preaches the first post-Pentecost sermon

+St. Peter performed the first miracle (Acts 3:1-10)

+God delivers revelation to Peter that Gentiles could now enter the Church without the need to observe Jewish Kosher food laws, and this teaching Peter made binding on the whole Church at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.

+St. Paul checked in with St. Peter before starting his public ministry. 

Eastern Orthodox Christians would also argue that the Eastern Fathers before the Great Schism did not believe in the primacy of the Pope, but here is a website debunking that. 

Hope that helps. If anything is confusing let me know. I’d also ask my fellow Catholics to correct me if I’m mistaken on any of these.

[izlaria]

Color theory in the Sanders Sides

I have seen a lot of people come up with theories since it was confirmed that Virgil was a dark side, especially when it comes to colors and to the fact that, if we follow color theory, we are missing the orange dark side that would oppose Logan. It’s difficult to say for sure, especially since, in terms of opposing colors, Deceit (yellow) should oppose violet, which we now see as representing Virgil, and not Patton’s blue-green.

I am a sucker for theories and headcanons, so I will be jumping into that same bandwagon.

If we followed the color wheel, then we would have Deceit-Virgil, Remus-Roman and the mysterious orange as Logan’s opposite, leaving Patton without a clear counterpart, as can be seen here:

Something I haven’t seen be pointed out, however, is that Virgil didn’t assume the violet/purple aesthetic until after he was incorporated into the main sides. His initial color, as many of you will remember, was black, maybe grey, So, the absence of color. It would make sense for him to be outside of this dualism, seeing as his domain seems to fall both as a fundamental part of Thomas (his main sides) and as a sometimes detrimental facet of him. This interpretation of Anxiety could allow him to be both a dark and a light side, depending on how he is seen by Thomas at any given moment.

I have seen people consider that he could have once been Roman’s counterpart (nothing curbs creativity quite like fear and insecutiry) or Logan’s counterpart (the irrationality to his logic), and I do still love both those theories, even with the addition of the Duke, but I don’t think they encompass all that Virgil is.

Like I’ve said before, I do think creativity can also delve into hard, sad places, which is where Roman and Virgil intersect. At the same time, Anxiety’s pessimism also leads to caution and careful consideration, which are things that Logic also values, though from a less biased perspective. It’s not for naught that people like to say Virgil and Logan are the left brain to Roman and Patton’s right brain.

If Virgil does not have a counterpart, light or dark, it solves the problem of the odd number of colors, but it also brings up the question of why he adopted purple in the first place. And here I go into headcanon territory, because I honestly think the purple was just a color Thomas and Joan liked for the character, possibly before they considered the color schemes.

I think Virgil could have chosen purple as a way to oppose Deceit, even if he is not his actual counterpart. Patton, complex as morality usually is, has Deceit as his obvious antithesis, but could also oppose Roman’s egocentric tendencies (as seen in Selfishness vs Selflessness) and even Logan’s insensitivity (Mind vs. Heart).

Meanwhile, Virgil, who we have all theorized to have a past with Deceit, chooses a representation of his decision to be more truthful and to escape the role he previously had, possibly as Paranoia (another theory that I simply love). Because wasn’t his whole arc about admitting that he didn’t actually want to be the villain? About confessing that he, too, just wanted what was best for Thomas, even if the others couldn’t see it?

He says it himself, in Learning new things about ourselves: “You once knew me as real gloomy, this weird spooky, broody dude, because I knew you would listen to me as too scary to ignore. I thought that I could take it, that the hate could just be shaken, but when you lo- care for someone, not much hurts more than their scorn. I also felt bad.”

This was the most honest we had ever seen Virgil. He had been lying to himself, up to a certain point, and encouraging Thomas to believe Deceit’s lies, because paranoia made him believe they were true. That Thomas’ friends didn’t actually like him, that going to a party would be a waste of time, because he wouldn’t have a good time there anyway. That lying to a friend about something was self-preservation, to make himself look better, to keep the people he loved close.

It’s not that much of a jump to believe that he had once been Deceit’s greatest ally.

So when he joined the main sides, he also adopted a color that would distance himself from the days when he was their villain. The one that would make it clear for the “dark sides”, and for a specific dark side, that he was no longer with them.

At the same time, we can’t ignore the possibility that Virgil might still have an opposite light side that we still haven’t seen: White, the mixture of all colors. What he would be is impossible to say for sure. Tranquility? Carelessness? Would he have grown darker due to Virgil’s transformation?

That leaves us with the final side, the Orange one, which I truly believe will be Logan’s true antithesis. Ignorance or irrationality or laziness or ire. The absence of knowledge and curiosity and rational thought.

Honestly, I can barely wait.

[deadlifts-and-derrida]

That one text post about growth that you found unsettling? Care to elaborate?

I think, with the world as it is right now, that foregrounding goodness, kindness, our ethical obligation to take care of one another, is really important. My sexual fantasies are often very greedy and self-centered. I try to make it that I don't encourage those parts of myself to overlap into the rest of my life. The idea that muscle growth has to come with some kind of Faustian pact by which the better parts of our minds and souls are burned away and we're turned into human livestock is dismaying to me, outside of the heat of an orgasmic moment (and who cares about that orgasmic moment, because the momentary blanking out of the higher self is just gonna happen then no matter what's getting you off, so....)

I always meant my blog to not just be a celebration of depraved muscle-engorged sensuality, but to also be a sensitive yet critical deconstruction of the same. So I am always resisting binaries and trying to slip free of dualism. Mind vs body. Freedom vs slavery. Pleasure vs duty. All these binaries. They're easy but they're false. Things are more complicated than that. I want to be a growth slut cow-man who still keeps a big sensitive heart and who still takes pleasure in taking ideas apart and looking at their guts.

[nikkiwriteswords]

My friend @cherrybombbecky and I are, first and foremost, nerds. So typically, we each had something to say about this article.  To summarise, it compares a ‘limited’ Western view of humanity with the Shinto concept of monism, with regards to robots and artificial intelligence. Westerners, the article claims, separate machine from man because its artifice renders it a ‘lesser’ being for not having a spirit or soul: 

The West [...] has a problem with the idea of things having spirits and feels that anthropomorphism, the attribution of human-like attributes to things or animals, is childish, primitive, or even bad.  

Therefore, to raise something artificial, like a doll or machine, to the level of mankind is incomprehensible to Western doctrines. It does not have a soul; it cannot be spiritual. 

However, to the Japanese:

Nature doesn’t belong to us, we belong to Nature, and spirits live in everything, including rocks, tools, homes, and even empty spaces. 

As such, even robots have a form of spirituality. To this end, the article goes on to make the case for a less human-centric view of emotional and spiritual consciousness. To continue to ‘dehumanise’ AI as it develops more and more ‘human’ traits is to reinforce the hierarchical systems of mankind's spiritual and ecological superiority that have been in place for centuries. 

If anyone has played Detroit: Become Human recently, you could perhaps empathise with the message of this article. Inequality is a theme tightly bound with mankind’s inherent superiority in the game. Depending on how you play, the androids seek equality or revolution from their human creators, because the humans do not recognise their own ‘humanity’. 

This existential crisis of spirituality vs. scientific progress has played out in the domain of sci-fi and fantasy for decades. Think Data from Star Trek: Next Gen. Think the Force in Star Wars (and the backlash towards midichlorians). The article sites Atom Boy as a manga that understands the relationship between Buddhist beliefs and robots to this end.  I would go one further, and claim Ghost in the Shell is a prime example of the blurred lines between AI and ‘humanity’, wherein ‘humanity’ relates to the having of a spirit/soul. To my Western eye, it is influenced greatly by Descartes’s mind-body dualism, or the ‘ghost in the machine’, wherein the mind can exist without a body, and vice-versa. The Major and the tachikoma are prime examples of this philosophy (to my layman’s understanding, I should point out). The tachikoma gain a ghost (or spirit) despite their artificial intelligence. 

Interesting as the debate is, as yet I can’t decide why I, as a Westerner, would not embrace artificial intelligence. The answer is in there, but it is not teased out:

Wedged in among the talk of mankind’s superiority over Nature and the natural world, our innate arrogance that raises our image alongside God, is the fear of our own obsoleteness.  When faced with a being so similar to ourselves, we trace the trajectory of its potential in the fall from our own pedestal.   

It may be a gross simplification of the issues at play, but I also think Fullmetal Alchemist touches on this same crisis of humanity, which contains echoes of science vs. religion. Again, very novice speculation here, but aren’t homunculi to alchemy what AI is to science? The pinnacle creation that places us alongside God?

In contrast to this matter of phenomenology, the structures of consciousness and subjective experience, @cherrybombbecky proposed a different outlook. Having lived in Japan for a number of years now, and being an armchair sociologist, she points out that artificial intelligence could encompass a social ideal for the Japanese. In a society governed by strict rules and hierarchy, which arguably fears disorder and chaos, an entity ruled by logic and protocol is an enticing prospect.  This is a notion that ties in with the aforementioned human ideal. Again, a lot of sci-fi deals with this idea of the ‘perfect human’, whose rationality and cool logic makes them superior to humans themselves. 

(NB: I would like to point out that this ‘superiority’ positions this second reading firmly within the hierarchy outlined by the first point.) 

Of course, it is therefore implicit that emotions are a human’s weakness. One anime that explores the ramifications of such an ideal is Psycho Pass. The Sybil System seeks to police society by rationalising emotions and assigning them a moral value. 

Granted, though Japanese, it is based on notable Western narratives. However, the idea that emotions can be ascribed a numerical value, a ‘criminal coefficient’, which can be used to measure morality or ‘mental beauty’, is an interesting concept.  The coefficient therefore ties emotionality to criminality, ascribing moral instability to the emotionally damaged. By implication, artificial intelligence is the perfect neutral value. Emotionlessness - artifice - is purity. The human ideal. 

Granted, it does not deal with the phenomenological issues of the original article or the other anime mentioned above. However, Psycho Pass does explore issues of existentialism (free will and authenticity), and ideals of moral beauty as applied to science-fiction and artificial intelligence.

 Ultimately, within this lens of man’s superiority, it seems to me that ‘humanity’ is tied up with emotional intelligence and empathy. The ability to connect on an emotional level. I connected with the tachikoma that’s for sure; they broke my heart. That is the factor that the Sybil System lacks. Empathy is the genius behind Detroit: Become Human also. The game exploits the very egotism that lens is based on: the idea that humans are unique for their emotional capacity to love and feel and connect. This, in turn, leads to the fear of humanity’s obsoleteness that arguably underpins the fear of artificial intelligence in the Western world.

(Also I have been dying to point out that humanoid robots that look exactly like ourselves, but lack the crucial capacity for ‘humanity’ or empathy, is full-on capital-U Freudian Uncanny. And can be pretty damn scary, so. OP probably didn’t consider that when writing the article.)

[unorthodoxcollegeloner-blog]

Dualism and Physicalism

Should we, as human beings, think of ourselves as made out of two different substances, like Descartes argued? Or are you persuaded by the arguments of physicalism that we are purely physical beings?

If you agree with Descartes, how would you explain the fact that our mental life seems to be very closely connected to a physical organ, namely the brain. If you agree with physicalism, how do you explain the fact that our mental life seems to be like nothing else in the physical world (think of how unique something like consciousness is, for example).

Write your thoughts on these issues.

I agree with Descartes on this issue, I feel that as human we are made up of different thing working together as one.

I feel that my mind works in ways that I do not wish for it to. For example, I have social anxiety and it can get so intense that I develop stomach problems as a result of it. Anxiety stems from a place of feeling like you do not belong in a certain setting or place. There is a segment of my mind telling me that I do not belong as another side of my brain tells me that I more than while I am engaging in normal activities but no one would know except me. 

My brain is fighting my anxiety all the while I am living life as if nothing is going on. This shows how different things can function differently at the same time but show just one thing outwardly. 

I believe that interactionalism exist between my brain and my body. For example the concept of following what I know vs what I feel to be true. This is a constant battle between my mind and my heart. I can choose which one to follow but the option of choosing between the two shows how two things can function at the same time. 

The brain and the body functions differently than one another. My mind is a kind of detached, personal space that is separate than the real world and my body is directly in the real world, yet they intertwine. They need each other to function properly but they work in different ways. 

For example, someone with schizophrenia who lives in a world of hallucinations and hallucinations mentally. The body is functioning well  but the mind is detached from the world and the body it is assigned to. The person is seen screaming at things that exists in their mind but does not exist in the real world. Being that everyone is in the real world but is assigned to a different body, other people can not see what he sees. There is a disconnect but in the real world.

On the other hand there is the example of someone who has had an accident and lost the ability to control half of their body. The mind is still alert and functioning but the body is not. Only half of the body can be used and that would take up some mental space as the person needs to relearn how to move the side of their body that is not functioning as well. 

As you can see in these example, the mind is the person’s connection to the world. Although the mind has its own state separate from the real world both states are necessary for the person to function properly. If the person gets lost in their mind, it can be difficult to separate what you think is true as opposed to what is actually true. With the example of the person with schizophrenia, they are in a world they believe to be true and can not necessarily decipher what is real from what is not.

If a person loses their connection to the real world, their ability to function as a body they are going to be present in their brain’s state. The ability to move and interact with the real world is what differs the brain and the body. 

[sjecblogarchive]

NEW TESTAMENT STUFF I NEED TO KNOW: SESSION 5FEBRUARY 2, 2017

02/02/2017

BY SJECWARRENTON

NEW TESTAMENT STUFF I NEED TO KNOW: SESSION 5FEBRUARY 2, 2017

Dear Saint James’ Learners,

I have attached two documents for our New Testament course. One is an updated version of the syllabus. The other is a worksheet which includes an outline for Chapter 7: Paul and His Letters, discussion questions, and the assigned Scripture passage with guidelines for praying the passage. I hope you will be able to read the entire chapter and pray the Scripture passage once a day for three days.

Updated Syllabus

Chapter 7 Outline

If you have any questions or comments, please contact me. Also if you know of other parishioners or friends that might want to join us, please invite them or let me know and I will call them.

Faithfully,

Randolph

(scroll down to read the outline for chapter 7)

LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE NEW TESTAMENT

Chapter 7: Paul And His Letters

Session Five: 2/5-2/11

READING ASSIGNMENT OUTLINE

“Apostle to the Gentiles”

rhetoric rather than personality in letters, 7 authentic letters, 6 “Pauline school”

moral dualism: difference between selfishness and altruism

reconciliation

PAUL’S LIFE

first-century Mediterranean culture

Roman citizen, Jewish family, Hellenistic culture, Pharisee

Damascus Road experience of the risen Christ

not a systematic theologian but a congregational pastor

martyred 64-68 CE

1 CORINTHIANS

(C.54 CE)

information about earliest Christianity

Corinthian church founded by Paul

“the saints,” primarily Gentiles

conflict arising from disagreement and competition, “strong” vs. “weak”

purpose of empowerment was collaboration in a shared enterprise

conflicts about sex and food

Hymn to Love, Body of Christ, spiritual gifts, moral transformation, “mind of Christ”

ROMANS

(57 CE)

mission to Spain, Phoebe, arrested in Jerusalem, apostleship, Hellenistic diatribe

“Sin is a distorted use of freedom that rejects God’s order and therefore distorts all human relations.”

“Jesus is a new Adam, who displays and exact opposite way of being human.”

empowerment through the Holy Spirit

membership in Israel by promise or election

religious enthusiast, theologian, pastor, writer, moral teacher

Discussion Questions

PAUL’S LIFE

What is your most important learning about Paul?

1 CORINTHIANS

What is your most important learning about the early church, using Corinth as an example?

ROMANS

What is an example of the connection between what you believe and what Paul preached?

Scripture Passage And Prayer

1 Corinthians 12:12-26

Settle into a comfortable sitting position. Be still and quiet.

With eyes closed, slowly say, “I see and receive the love and joy with which God gazes at me as I gaze at God.”

Remain still and quiet with eyes closed for awhile.

Open eyes and slowly read the Scripture passage, pausing after every verse.

Notice what words or phrases capture your curiosity.

Notice what words or phrases touch your heart.

Notice what words or phrases cause you to consider a specific act of faith.

Close with a sentence of gratitude.

[dopingconsomme]

[2021年04月04日の記事一覧 http://dailyfeed.jp/feed/23378/2021-04-04] https://dopingcomplex.blogspot.com/2021/04/20210404-httpdailyfeedjpfeed233782021.html

(全 45 件)

1. Deficio - In the Hall of the Mountain King

2. m.o.v.e - アンインストール

3. T.M.Revolution - HOT LIMIT

4. 川井憲次 - Folder

5. 川井憲次 - Face-love ver.

6. タニウチヒデキ - ヨツバ殺しの会議室

7. 伊福部昭 - King Kong vs. Godzilla - Original Soundtrack Theme

8. 高田雅史 - V3議論 -SCRUM-

9. 平野義久 - Semblance of Dualism

10. 菅野祐悟 - My mind, my body, my spirit and all of you

11. 早見沙織 - 夏目と寂寥

12. 川井憲次 - Fill

13. anzo - Shrine

14. Swinging Peppermints - The Man Who Sold the World

15. AC/DC - Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap

16. Stan Bush - Don't Give Up On Love

17. 高木正勝 - Girls (Live at めぐろパーシモンホール, 東京, 2015)

18. Toby Fox - MEGALOVANIA

19. Ys - チップチューン地獄の終わり

20. ザ・ウィークエンド - Save Your Tears

21. マイク・シノダ - Happy Endings (feat. iann dior and UPSAHL)

22. Benny Blanco - You (with Marshmello & Vance Joy)

23. マシュメロ - Too Much (feat. Usher)

24. DJスネイク - Selfish Love (with Selena Gomez)

25. ザラ・ラーソン - Look What You've Done

26. Why Don't We - Unbelievable

27. マルーン５ - Beautiful Mistakes (feat. Megan Thee Stallion)

28. トロイ・シヴァン - IN A DREAM

29. クリーン・バンディット - Higher (feat. iann dior)

30. ビリー・アイリッシュ - Therefore I Am

31. Astrid S - Marilyn Monroe

32. Celeste - Tonight Tonight

33. アン・マリー - Problems

34. Ava Max - My Head & My Heart

35. マシュメロ - Be Kind (with Halsey)

36. Arkells - You Can Get It

37. Upsahl - STOP!

38. ニック・ジョナス - This Is Heaven

39. ゼッド - Funny

40. ビービー・レクサ - Sacrifice

41. Aja - Red Button

42. Johnny Orlando - I Don’t (with DVBBS)

43. Peach Tree Rascals - Change My Mind

44. Raye - Love Of Your Life

45. ジェイソン・デルーロ - Lifestyle (feat. Adam Levine)

from dopingconsommecomplex http://dailyfeed.jp/feed/23378/2021-04-04 http://www.rssmix.com/ from complex fc2 dcons, https://dopingcomplex.blogspot.com/2021/04/20210404-httpdailyfeedjpfeed233782021.html

[aspectarchive]

the Aspect Archive

 “Aspects are the twelve ideals and points that make up all of reality. Each has an opposite, and with this opposite, they form 6 individual spectrums that make up all of reality. Two of them form the physical world: Space and Time, and the rest focus on the ways that people interact with reality. Everyone has a bit of all the aspects in them, but there tends to be one that people can identify with more than any others. This aspect will probably come to define them in subtle ways, and they gain an instinct for the flow and feel and shape of this aspect, and it largely comes to represent them whether they know it or not.

            Every idea can be traced, in some way, back to these aspects. The concept of a spectrum cataloguing everything might seem alien, but it is in fact well explored. Consider the four classical elements or the five colors of Magic: The Gathering.  This is simply another schema available for looking at it, and looking at people.”

-quoted text from inifinitywhale’s Ultimate Classpect post

Aspect Theory - the basics

Aspect is the part of this whole system that I love the most. I’m not sure why, but I find the abstract functions of it really fascinating; discovering how they all interact, noticing them all at work in characters, in the game, in the fabric of reality. I’ve created this post with the intent of gathering as many references and resources as I can to provide a thorough explanation of the various aspects. It is and will remain a work-in-progress as I find new links to add, new ideas to discuss, and so on.

Note: this means I’m always open to new ideas! If you have anything to contribute, I’d love to discuss it and add it to my archive.

(more under the cut)

Aspects work into a general dichotomy, but can also been organised into a wheel. Like a compass, with the cardinal aspects acting as N and S. One of my favourite theorists, bladekindeyewear, organised this Aspect Wheel to demonstrate how they flow together.

Now, the wheel is very theoretical, but it is an excellent perspective on the relationships between aspects, and the application of it is fun.

I’ll be constructing a more in-depth post on the Aspect Wheel at another time.

But speculative wheel aside for now, back to the dichotomy. It may not be stated explicitly in canon, but aspect dualism is pretty certain theory at this point (feel free to disagree, but most seem to subscribe to it). Each aspect has a pair, intertwined so intimately that they essentially define each other in photo-negative - the shadows of one is filled by the other. Within every pair is a more, let’s say, optimistic half and a pessimistic half - like yin and yang. Neither is any better or worse than the other, but they are the inverse of each other.

(Aspect dualism discussed at length by BKE)

The general trend is between creation and destruction. The creation vs destruction dichotomy is pervasive in every piece of Homestuck lore, but particularly in aspect dualism. Space and Time embody it the most literally, making them the two cardinal aspects. Between the two of them they represent physical reality.

You’ll notice on the wheel referenced above that the rest of the aspects are divided into two halves around Space and Time, aligning themselves with one while their inverse aligns with the other.

The Archive

Links and keywords for a quick overview of each aspect

Note: if anyone knows of other posts discussing particular aspects, I’d love to add them to my archive. This list will continue to be a work-in-progress and I always accept more additions.

First, some masterposts discussing all aspects (including those linked above):

Ultimate Classpect Post - infinitywhale

 Aspect duality - bladekindeyewear

Aspect Wheel - bladekindeyewear

aspect related concepts/keywords - creative-classpect

aspects and philosophy - the worst person in the world

the aspects as in SKRUB - Project SKRUB

aspect ‘personalities’ - classesandaspects

Aspects - 2classpect4this

A Guide to Classpect - gaytog

Space - physical matter, forces and dimensions, physics, literal space and the fabric of reality, distance, creation, evolution and change/variation, uniqueness/originality, physical appearance

Time - time, progress, inevitability, mortality, uncertainty, death, beginnings and endings, entropy, patterns, repetition

Rhythm and Variation - creative-classpect

Life - energy, growth, optimism, rebellious, change, power, reckless, wealth & luxury, consumption

Doom - order, rules/laws, pessimism, restriction, sacrifice, consequences, limitation, entropy/decay, caution, conservation

Life, Doom, and one large fence - sepulchritude

Breath - freedom, movement, direction, questing, disconnection, individuality, motivation

Blood - bonds and relationships (of all kinds), duty, commitment, obligation, promises and pacts,

Breath, Blood, and the Flow of Reality - bladekindeyewear

Heart - self, soul, desire, emotion, internal self, sentiment, irrationality, morals, passions, individuality, identity, intuition and impulses

Mind - logic, choice, decisions, external self, facade, justice, ethics, identity, reason, rationality

Mind v Heart - 2classpect4this

Mind and Options - taksynator

Mind - lotarclasspects

Hope - belief, possibilities, open-mindedness, positive emotions, optimism, trust and ideals, willpower, worldview

Rage - conviction, determination, negative emotions, absoluteness, passion, ambition and willpower, worldview

9′s guide to Rage - creative-classpect

important to remember about Hope and Rage - Dahni

more keywords for Hope/Rage - creative-classpect

Light - perception, knowledge, clarity, circumstantial significance, agency and will, illumination, sight

Void - mystery, secrecy, irrelevance, insignificance, darkness, absence, incomprehensibility, nonsense

Light and Void - bladekindeyewear

A Page of Light on Light - taksynator

Void as anything - Dahni

if you’re really curious about Void just. listen to the podcast Welcome to Night Vale. it embodies Void. Night Vale IS Void, narrated by Seer of Void, Cecil Palmer.

And always remember;

http://creative-classpect.tumblr.com/post/158071367105/not-one-aspect-is-more-powerful-than-others

https://classpect-nation.tumblr.com/post/158727614998/as-i-like-to-say-it-its-you-who-define-your

https://mindtheclasspect.tumblr.com/post/159414193252/classpect-psa

[naruhearts]

14x10: Destiel, Cowboys, and Pamela Barnes

Blatant Dean/Cas-coded M/F cowboy cutouts from 13x06 Tombstone resurface again in Rocky’s Bar (Rocky & Bullwinkle; subtext: Rock Hudson, first queer Hollywood star diagnosed with HIV/AIDS), and I’m thumping the table (besides obvious meta on their intrinsic links to D/C visual narrative and what it MEANS) because firstly:

Mind!Pamela takes up female Cas-coded cowboy’s place in frame, aligning her to Cas himself, and as everyone’s discussed already, here we have Michael’s construct/Dean’s complex manifestation of Pamela the Cas mirror — dark-haired and olive skinned best friend and independent tough nut. Sounds familiar...(my full meta 14x10 review is still in progress :P but I’ll be linking this post to it!)

Dean’s mind - Rocky’s Bar itself - is an entire subconscious construct of all the various facets of his identity, both textual AND heavily (closely surface) subtextual: his bisexuality, his humanity, his deep-seated desire for human socialization represented by bars in the first place — his want for a good platonic friend, a beautiful and honest one, who fights beside him, helps him keep the bar - his most important accomplishment and dream - in order, and whom he likes flirting with.

This version of Pamela Barnes -- both Dean’s memory projection and Michael’s construct of her -- is the subconscious MIRROR of whom Dean really wants that indeed calls him out on his desires: Cas. Their dialogue held romantic connotations within a mainly romantic context (“How come you always have a boyfriend?”). Pamela = subconscious double subtextual entendre of bisexuality and Destiel.

Mind!Pamela tells him “You don’t want me - you just like to flirt,” and his curtain of performativity is indeed drawn back. It’s true! Dean likes to flirt. He’s naturally charming, and he tickles the fancy of every person - man and woman - who crosses his path, but recall everything else we know about Dean Winchester, where his natural behaviour is used to: A. gain traction for a case, or B. grab him casual flings (that can also be abused as an unhealthy coping mechanism re: Burying-My-Problems) where he gets drunk, shackles up, and says adios the next morning; his semi-serial monogamy (and his penchant for threesomes/fivesomes *yes, including the M/F Doublemint Twins and almost-textual super overt M/M/M/M/M Drowley*) is a temporary substitute for chasing after long-term romantic attachments that are “unacceptable” in the LifeTM. Pain, horror, and death, like his old man dictated, in that romantic attachments are nothing but a hindrance. I digress—

Mind!Pamela (Michael) was able to see through him and his performativity. Dean is content that she, a psychic who “kinda knows” -- who can distinguish his truths and lies -- is someone whom he feels no obligation to perform for. He can embody the non-repressed version of himself.

The multi-layered D/C take home message: Michael knows who Dean wants. Again, in an evocative Empty-parallel manner, Michael knows “who you love, what you fear”, and it is the angel, now more humanized than ever. Cas is the antithesis of Michael and the one who strikes the balance within Dean’s life course.

Quick aside - how about Dean’s role in Cas’ narrative? Without sounding redundant, I’ll briefly talk about balance.

Dean facing Michael - who took Dean’s visage --> “I Am You” definitely called back to severely broken 5x04 Human!Cas and 13x21 AU!Cas. Cas’ Dark mirror selves outlined the visual/narrative dualism of Cas’ fragile personal nature: the two extremes on either ends of Cas’ identity spectrum: Dark Angel vs Dark Human. Dean Humanity and Free Will Winchester strikes his personal balance. Knowing Dean balances Cas’ personal nature. Through Dean, Cas has discovered kinship. Family. Free will. Love. 

AU CAS: You’re aligning yourself with the humans.

CAS: I vastly prefer them to angels.

AU CAS: Don’t think you are better than me. We are the same.

CAS: Yes.

x

Both 13x21 AU!Cas and Cas were already lost to Heaven (under their pre-existing internally rebellious human streak/inclination for Humanity), but unlike AU!Cas, he was guided –> found, in every sense of the word, by Dean.

14x10 echoed 13x21 via Michael!Dean vs Dean in that Dean has what Michael does not: meaningful interpersonal relationships that can drag him back from the brink of dark extremism.

x

(Cas needs you to come back, Dean.)

Dean has found freedom through Cas. Self-acceptance. Happiness. Love and...Love.

What Dean still perceives, however, is that he is unworthy of Cas, which Pamela the Cas reflection points out: “How come you only want what you can’t have?”. Dean wants Cas, and he is fully cognizant and self-aware of that fact. He searches for the rainbow endlessly, but he’s uncertain…afraid of the wind’s flow (and his internalization of low self-worth remains --> he believes “all good things come to an end”. Temporary contentment, where he’s undeserving of such good things as epitomized by real estate woman who wants to infringe on Dean’s property/dream; ‘sell it out’ literally and figuratively). 

Either Dean will find his pot of gold waiting for him, or he won’t, and this is the underlying star-crossed literary beauty of the D/C narrative.

Dean’s sick of pretending. He WANTS the wind to show him the way, but we must remember that, in an episode rich with the concept of authorial authority - writing your own fate and ever-glaring Free Will - he NEEDS to blow the wind himself. If he just allows himself to believe that he can have true happiness, then he will.

Secondly, we see Dean and Cas distinctly occupy the visual spaces of their counterpart in both 13x06 and 14x10 (you can also see phallic Space Cowboy aka Cosmic Cowboy in the first frame), subtextually interlinking the episodes together in continuous Destiel narrative symmetry.

And the bar is further decorated by bisexual hues of blue, pink, and purple, with the M/F cutouts serving as an additional silent manifestation of Dean’s bisexuality (mind you, overall Rocky’s Bar was swimming in queer subtext, but I won’t go too far into it here; I have my 14x10 review for that).

You’re not truly alone, Dean. You have Sam and Jack.

And Cas is there for you. *hello two fish fixtures; Cas = Fish* (I lack a screengrab). 

Cas will look for you, and he will find you, and he will fight for you, and he will support you, and he will take care of you, and he will freely make sacrifices for you, because you’re more than strong in his eyes.

Two cowboys. Two beers ((romantic) bonding connotations: Heart and Home). The HEART painting in a painting in a dream setting -- THE DREAM Dean wants, which lends him contentment. Full circle.

@coinofstone also points out the cavaleras Dean = Dog meta juxtaposed by Cas = Cat united within a domestic partnership, which absolutely gets me goin’! *serves cake* 

x

Cas has your heart, Dean. And you have his. 

Silent storytelling by Yockey/Wanek, ladies and gentlemen.

(13x06 and 14x10 skeleton painting screengrabs by @coinofstone; 14x10 by @ravenscat-tumbler)

[naruhearts]

Love it, yep yep ^^

Dean and Cas, as per usual, connected in the queer subtext even though they were physically separated, and it’s also certainly awesome that — besides playing the boundaries between serious queercoding and just-a-tad-of-humour re: ‘mistaken for gay’ trope well — we saw some SOLID platonic Sam/Cas interactions (everyone talked about it more than once already lol) that held a rich personal purpose in distinguishing Cas’ respective relationships with him (familial) vs Dean (romantic/sexual).

As Dimples mentioned in her reblog: interestingly, this time Dean occupied the narrative’s negative spaces. Conrad was his mirror, significantly separated from his lover Sunny who made a promise to her dead mother (Cas’ promise to Kelly Kline of protecting Jack and the Empty presumably — most likely — separating Dean and Cas when they’re right on the cusp of loving each other freely) and considered herself imperative in carrying it out, and don’t even get me started on all the colour symbolism permeating 14x15: green and blue Destiel-tinged hues, with the key thing being the green-blue-clad conservative BnB matron pointedly fixating on Cas’ apparent non-normative existence in Idyllic Nuclear-Heteronormative Town (“You gotta have morals...you know...”), like Cas always has been: out of place and uniquely living beyond norms as a queer-coded wavelength of celestial intent who cannot fit in one box, who was visibly into describing the male penis (inside a green-painted room) — while miles away Dean reacted to Donatello’s description of his prostate size resembling a papaya (Cas = penetrating; Dean = being penetrated) (Yockey and Fitz have done a spectacular job here??).

And I think it’s pertinent to mention that Cas used to be Castiel Angel of the Lord and Moral Soldier who held preconceived notions of how humanity is supposed to behave based on the social constraints and laws of Heaven until he met Dean, which of course, roused his pretty inherent inclination for humanity (where “too much heart was always Castiel’s problem”) and moulded his perspective into one of autonomy and free will, so seeing Cas in the narrative role of outsider, queer subtext-entrenched, within an otherwise conservatively moral Charming Acres reflecting real-life conservative ideals — the disapproval of carnal/erotic relations between man and woman outside of procreation, nuclear family on the town billboard etc — was intelligently done.

Snakes ‘bite’ - Dean believes they aren’t dangerous/bad creatures in themselves until provoked. I totally saw some potential queer subtext in Jack feeding the snake various types of food...sort of testing out its tastes, where Dean suggests bacon, a meat, and thus he brings to mind the historical bisexual coding associated with it, so that was cool. Dean additionally carried a stash of dualism-coded (and bi-coded) Angel / Devil “cream-filled cakes” *hello cake vs pie meta*; Jack chose the Angel cake for the snake accordingly. You could say Dean’s the snake, too...outwardly dangerous Hunter but internally hungry: for affection and love and being true to oneself and, well, Cas (oh I saw your meta on that - exactly *claps*) and snakes overall holding phallic and fertility symbolism...

Dean then tiptoed around the snake-in-the-box. And, uh, think about the metaphorical connotations of that too — say, a penis-in-the-closet lol

Let’s go Dean!

A masterclass in humor tropes

This episode was so precious because it allowed for the “mistaken for gay” trope without making the humor coming from the fact that ~the character is not queer aha get it they thought he was gay~. By pairing up Cas and Sam, the humor comes from the fact that Cas is mistaken for being into Sam (my partner… beautiful hair…), so we can have the mistaken-for-gay humor without the implication that the character isn’t like that.

Obviously this goes for Dean too when he and Sam are mistaken for a couple, since the humor comes from the fact they’re actually brothers, but we’re used to people reading Dean as queer, while it’s something pretty fresh for Cas, and the episode plays well with the line between queercoding and mistaken-for-gay humor. The humor comes from Cas finding himself in a situation where he is forced by circumstances (having to describe Sam, having to say what the letters’ passionate nature was about…) to do things that make him appear queer… while the circumstances are not in fact appropriate for it (people being homophobic, Sam not caring for hearing Cas erotically describe a penis, etc). And, obviously, by the subtext inherent to the fact that Cas is the one character that goes absolutely nope at the hypertraditional, stereotyped, rigidly heterosexual scenario that Sam instead falls in because he subconsciously identifies with that kind of “happiness” (the problem being that that happiness isn’t real, in Sam’s case a metaphor for the impossibility for him to achieve the apple pie life given the circumstances of his life).

Basically, the humor comes from Cas being the Only Sane Man, where the Only Sane Man is such because he sees the absolute artificiality and absurdity of the ideal of the traditional life in the “good ol’ times” while being both coded as queer by the subtext and perceived as queer by the characters.

Additionally, the tropes associate Dean and Cas, because Dean is also the Only Sane Man next to Jack’s weird behavior and inability to get Dean’s humor, and Donatello who is a darling but doesn’t have a soul. Clearly humor comes from Dean too, but being wary of snakes is pretty common thus not particularly bizarre, while Jack’s attachment to the snake that he carries on the road trip instead is, and Dean using cakes to avoid outright asking Jack is he feels more oriented to good or evil is kind of adorable.

While Cas is ostensibly “out of place” in Charming Acres, Dean is uncomfortable and awkward throughout all the trip with Jack. While Cas does not belong in the neighborhood, Dean physically is “out of place”: he stays outside of Donatello’s house, in fact he even stays outside of the car while he waits for Jack. They’re both framed as ill-suited for the situation, and as outsiders: Cas is a symbolical outsider in Charming Acres, Dean is physically outside and symbolically out of his depth with Jack’s soul situation…

[jenibel0210]

Dualism

Descartes made valuable points on dualism that I agree with. an example of this would be how Descartes states that the brain and the body are two different entities and it seems to me that people even back then kind of knew that as well. When it came to some indigenous practices back then people would notice that the heart was still beating even though it was just ripped out of someone body, this pinpoints how the brain and body work together but definitely in separate ways. The body needs the brain to function but the brain functions in any body you place it in. Although, in the end the body can still function on it's own just like the brain.

No matter how people tend to acknowledge that the brain is a very important organ, doctors still managed to do brain transplants in order for people to just be physically be better when they have a tumor that isn't curable unless this process takes place. Descartes has shown that we can know our ways of our mind and sometimes our body but our mind is more self-sufficient because it’s always the same. what I can argue is that nature vs. nurture can kind of decipher that we don’t know anyone’s mind except the person themselves, unless they have a terrible mental illness. in the end Descartes made some very interesting points when it came to the mind and body not really fully needing each other.

[shuheiohmori]

Title: Loving Paradoxes: A Feminist Reclamation of the Goddess Kali Author: Vrinda Dalmiya, 2000, pp.125-150

Feminist significance of the Goddess Kali

1.      Why Kali, again?

Iconography of the Goddess Kali from India: construction of femininity and motherhood

Hymn;

Mother, incomparably arrayed,

Hair flying, stripped down,

You battle-dance on Shiva's heart,

A garland of heads that bounce off

Your heavy hips, chopped-off hands

For a belt, the bodies of infants

For earrings, and the lips,

The teeth like jasmine, the face

A lotus blossomed, the laugh,

And the dark body billowing up and out

Like a storm cloud, and those feet

Whose beauty is only deepened by blood.

So Prasad cries: My mind is dancing!

Can I take much more? Can I bear

An impossible beauty?

(Ramprasad 1982, 65)

 Kali: both a wife and a mother and an immodest, aggressive, and grotesque wife and a terrifying, violent and self-absorbed mother.

Why, duality exists?

 Passivity and tenderness of Kali

Kali, why are You naked again?

Good grief, haven't You any shame?

Mother don't You have clothes?

Where is the pride of a king's daughter?

And Mother, is this some family duty-

This standing on the chest of Your man?

(1982, 46)

 Ramprasad asks: Who taught You to be so cold?

If You want to be like Your father-

Stone-don't call Yourself

The Mother.

(1982, 32)

 However, Kali’s manifest form is violent and uncaring. Therefore, Kali symbolises the paradoxical dyads: passivity/aggressiveness; traditionality/unconventionality; beautiful/grotesque; tender/terrifying.

 WORSHIPPING KALI/ LOVING THE MOTHER

Another Paradox

Goddess of Kali/ the love of Kali (Kali is scolded, and becomes a relentless litany of her faults and misdemeanours)

Kali-bhakti

Kali: literally means “darkness” and “time”

Goddess Kali: associated with the power of transformation – not merely in a cosmic sense, but in the personal lives of countless devotees who regard Her as the Divine Mother.

Bhakti: ‘loving devotion’ & refers to the manifold approaches of dedication to one’s patron deity.

Kali-bhakti: describes the path of loving devotion to goddess Kali.

 Devotee, like Ramprasad expects spiritual liberation through Kali-worship.

 West way of dualism thinking is risky

1.      Orientalism

Rationality of the West vs. spirituality of the East

‘Mind’ vs. ‘body’ à cause a new hierarchy

2.      Kali has been co-existing happily with patriarchal structures and the oppression of women in India. Can we [real feminists] potential in her symbolism or worship after all?

 Kali, The “Mother” OF THE CHILD

Gods and Goddesses in the Indian Tradition are constituted in three layers;

1.      Ichnographically represented celestial beings whose intricate biographies are narrated in mythological tales [adhidaivika]

-        Kali is naked

She stands in for all women:

 You’ll find Mother

In any house.

Do I dare say it in public?

…..

She’s mother, daughter, wife, sister-

Every woman close to you

 What more can Ramprasad say?

You work the rest out from these hints.

(1982, 60)

As a symbol of femininity

i.                 As serving patriarchal purposes and emerging from male fear of female sexuality

ii.                As a genuine feminine self-assertion and power, a mother who is not afraid of stepping out the conventions of motherhood to express herself – her rage and her needs.

 However, Kali is more than the feminine!

 2.      They are vital principles of the lived-body of the devotee [adhyatmika]

Spiritual progress is equivalent to yogic control of the kulakundalini, making it rise to the "highest centre" in the crown of the head. This is the state of blissful repose.

 -        Kali is spelled out by the meditational metaphysics of Tantra.

[Kulakundalini: meaning ‘serpent power’]

 Now cry Kali and take the plunge!

O, my Mind, dive into this sea,

...

Now, hold your breath

And jump! Kick down to where She [Kulakundalini] sits

Deep in the wise waters, a great pearl.

(1982, 54)

 The ascent of the kundalini to its peak is represented ichnographically by the dancing Kali frozen into immobility (achievement) upon stepping on Shiva (the "highest centre").

  3.      They are principles in the environment or cosmos [adhibhautika]

-        Kali’s dance is the eternal change of the natural order.

-        Kali’s terrifying form is a pictorial expression of the brutal fact that everything in nature is constantly changing

-        Change is really decay and finally death

 Thus, Goddess is not only a suprahuman deity but is simultaneously a principle in the inner and outer realms.

An act of worship: dwelling on a deity, on a vital principle (internal to the body) and on a cosmic principle all at once.

 Kali as Prakrti

-        The source of everything and is thus a metaphysical “Mother”

... You are the Mother of all

And our nurse. You carry the Three Worlds

in Your belly.

(1982, 28)

 Similar to the notion of TAO??? (as I mentioned before!)

 The dance of Kali is an important metaphor. A dance suggests playfulness and light-heartedness. Equally importantly, it is constant movement or change. Etymologically, Kali is a feminine form of kila, which means time. But time and change are just euphemisms for decay and death. Kali is thus the paradox: She is the Primal Mother who brings forth all life even while she signifies Death. Everything that there is,everything "natural," is the vale of Death even though it is nothing other than Kali/Prakrti, the source of life.